BATTLES FROM THE BULGE: First Impressions...
Giftzwerg
Panther Games' COMMAND OPS: BATTLES FROM THE BULGE is the latest
incarnation of their innovative and excellent AIR ASSAULT series, the
welcome (and long-awaited) successor to HIGHWAY TO THE REICH and
CONQUEST OF THE AEGEAN.
http://www.matrixgames.com/products/377/details/Command.Ops:.Battles.fro
m.the.Bulge.
Nuts and Bolts
The game is available from Matrixgames, via either physical shipment or
digital download. As always, the purchasing experience from Matrix's
online store is simple and problem-free. Click on "Buy," insert your
payment method, download. The download is about 900MB, so be sure your
ComCast bill is current.
Installation is similarly trivial. Double click the installer, and
you're almost done. DRM hassles are non-existent; the only copy
protection is Matrix's usual standard; you get a simple serial number
with your download link (and in the follow-up email). Plop this into
the appropriate spot in the installation process, and you're the proud
*owner* of your game. Save your serial number along with the installer,
and you can be playing ten years from now.
Thanks again, Matrix / Panther. This is much appreciated.
The price, however, is controversial at $80. Some folks are saying it's
beyond their price point. They have a point. I'm saying I was fully
expecting it to cost $60, and an extra twenty bucks is pretty trivial in
a world where my cable TV / internet connection is $220 a
month.
The game runs without trouble. I'm playing it on a lightweight Lenovo
Ideapad U350, Windows 7 Pro, with 3GB ram and a mediocre dual-core
processor. Fast, snappy, fine. I haven't seen a single issue, bug-
wise; the game is rock-solid. Productivity fans will appreciate that
BFTB plays well with Windows and other programs. You can minimize it,
run other things, let it sit overnight, return to it and it's working
fine.
Also welcome is the fact that - unlike too many of his fellows - the
designer appears to understand that *nobody* is using an 800x600 or
1024x768 monitor anymore. BFTB runs on a wide variety of widescreen
monitors up to modern standards. Like it's predecessors, it will also
run on non-standard resolutions via a command-line parameter.
With respect to documentation, BATTLES FROM THE BULGE is simply first
rate. I've hammered Matrix on several occasions for shitty manuals and
lack of tutorials, but this is a horse of a different color. The
manuals - there are four of them: game, map-maker, scenario editor, and
estab (unit) editor - come in both screen and print versions, and are
comprehensive, well-written, and effective.
Panther also includes an excellent series of tutorial videos; a half-
dozen unpretentious sessions where principal designer Dave O'Connor
takes the viewer through the accompanying "Return to St. Vith" scenario.
At about 15 minutes length each, these do a wonderful job to orient the
new gamer and educate the AA / CO veteran. I've played both HIGHWAY TO
THE REICH and CONQUEST OF THE AEGEAN to tatters, and many times during
the videos I was saying, "Yeah. Shit. I should do that."
There are almost 30 individual scenarios ranging across the whole area
of the battle. Newcomers should remember that this game is called
"Battles *from* the Bulge" - not "Battle *of* the Bulge." This is an
operational-tactical game, not a strategic-operational game. You will
be fighting discrete parts of the overall operation - not commanding the
whole offensive in charge of two panzer armies and supporting forces.
Generally speaking, you'll be commanding a corps or less, composed of a
couple of divisions plus attached corps units. There's a pretty good
range of scenarios and they're very representative of the important
phases of the overall battle. There's no "campaign" option available,
something I really don't care about but that some gamers like.
Individual units are companies, platoons, and sections, organized by
higher headquarters into a command hierarchy that reaches through
battalion HQ to regimental HQ to divisional HQ to corps HQ.
Included are programs to build DYO scenarios. The "scenario maker" and
"mapmaker" programs were a part of the previous two games in the series
- but Panther has this time out included the "estab" editor which will
allow the erstwhile user-scenario author to create units and formations
which do not appear in the game.
User Interface
The UI is stellar, and has been refined only marginally from the
original HIGHWAY TO THE REICH. To be fair, there wasn't a lot of room
for improvement. To issue commands, you simply select a headquarters
(or individual unit), click on the button corresponding to what task you
want it to do, then click the place on the map where you want the task
carried out.
Since you can issue orders to any level in the command hierarchy, this
greatly reduces the tedium involved with routines tasks. For example,
in a turn-based wargame of the same scope, you might receive a
reinforcement brigade that enters the map far from the front lines. If
this regiment has, say, 25 maneuver units, and it will take eight turns
to advance it to the front, you're going to have to click on units and
move them *200 times* just to get them to a point where you have to give
them a more interesting order than, "move this way, keep moving this
way, this way again, just like last turn, just like next turn."
In BFTB, you just click on the brigade HQ, click the "move" button, and
click the map where you want it to end up. The whole unit will move
out, move to where you want it, and politely inform you when it arrives.
*Three clicks* instead of *three hundred clicks*.
Of course (more on this later) you could give orders to individual units
- and in some cases you will want to do this - but the pure tedium of
moving hundreds of units in situations where fiddly placement makes no
difference is just absent.
Orders can be modified / qualified in many different ways. You can set
waypoints to fine-tune a unit's path to the objective, simply by shift-
clicking along the way. You can use option buttons to set *how* you
want the task carried out. For example, you can set the unit's
aggressiveness, rate of fire, and tolerance for casualties. You can set
a specific time you want the task to be done (and good luck with this,
given the terrible uncertainty the game brings out), you can set the
formation. All sorts of possibilities.
There are no turns or phases. Just like a real commander, you can issue
orders at any time. The game runs in continuous time, but you can slow
it down, speed it up, or pause it completely, giving orders at any time
or speed.
The graphics are more-or-less "wargame standard" 2D. The modeling of
the map is highly advanced in three dimensions, but what you're looking
at is simply a colored top-down map that can be zoomed in and out. The
counters are similarly bog-standard wargame fare. Squares with symbols
and numbers which can be easily configured to reflect different value.
Battles are depicted by puffs of smoke erupting from units under fire,
and lanes of fire drawn as the fire missions go in. Sound is Spartan,
as well, with the puffs of smoke accompanied by the sounds of
explosions.
But nobody is buying the game for zippity-zoom graphics and
quadrophenia.
The System
... is what sets BATTLES FROM THE BULGE apart from the competition.
This is not your father's dumb boardgame ported onto a monitor. The
designers long ago looked at hexagons, turns, rolling dice on combat
charts ... then they balled all that ludicrous nonsense into a wad and
tossed it into the trash. Where it belongs.
The central concept of BFTB is that the player isn't required to move
nonsentient individual counters in a micromanagerial nightmare - the
player represents a corps or divisional commander who gives orders to
his regiments or battalions, sets the parameters around their given
mission, and allows the subordinate headquarters to handle the
management of the companies, platoons, and sections to achieve the goals
set for it.
The genius of COMMAND OPS: BATTLES FROM THE BULGE is that the artificial
intelligence programming is actually (really!) up to the task of
managing a player's units without pathological micromanagement. The
corollary to this is that, in the real world, a corps commander who
*tried* to issue individual orders to every company and unit under his
command - all *200* of them, bypassing the chain of command - would
destroy his command utterly.
There are two things required to pull off this kind of brilliance in a
game:
(1) The Tactical AI (TacAI) the player delegates to command subordinate
units must be smart and up to the task.
(2) The interface must be so well-conceived that the player can command
his force in a very realistic way.
BFTB succeeds on both levels. Really. I'm not bullshitting.
Consider an illustration of the difference between BFTB and a
conventional "hex & turn" PC wargame of the same scope:
Let's say the situation being modeled is an American armored infantry
battalion with supporting tank company attacking a German infantry
company with attached StuG section in a small town.
In a conventional game, you would click on a US armored infantry company
counter, move it a few hexes so it was adjacent to the Germans. Then
click on the other infantry counter, and move it adjacent. Then move
the tank company adjacent. Then move the armored cars adjadent. Then
click on the mortar unit and click on "bombard," selecting the German
hex as the target. Then you press "resolve attack" and see what
happens.
Here's how it works in BFTB:
You select the armored infantry battalion HQ that has the tank company
attached. Select "attack" from the orders sidebar. Select the form-up
point for the attack, then fix the objective. The attack is now set.
To fine-point your orders, select qualifying orders: set the frontage to
400 meters, the depth to 300 meters, set the formation to "vee," set the
parameters to "maximum aggressiveness," and "rapid fire," and "ignore
casualties." Set the unit's artillery to "support me only." Start the
clock moving and watch the tank unit form up, move out, and assault.
Which seems more realistic?
See, in the real world, how does the orders dialog between the general
commanding the division and the colonel commanding the tank battalion's
attack go?
(1) "Jack, I need to take Schnickelfritz at all costs. I want you to
move the 4-4-5 ARM counter two hexes to adjacent to the Germans. Then
move the 5-2-8 TNK counter three hexes to stack with the ARM. Add the
mortar unit to get the one-column shift. Move the other infantry
counter adjacent for the whole-unit benefit, and stack them with the
armored car counter for the +1 (two armor) die modifier. I really need
a "retreat one hex" at minimum. Good luck."
(2) "Jack, I need to take Schnickelfritz at all costs. I need your
55th Tank to hit them from the axis Bierstein - Schnickelfritz as soon
as possible. Maximum effort. Narrow front - ignore your flanks. AT.
ALL. COSTS. Out."
The point is that the BFTB system *never* has you thinking in terms of
"combat factors" or "CRT columns" or "die rolls" - and *always* in terms
of "what are my objectives," and "what intelligence do I have about the
enemy," and "which of my units are capable of the orders I might
issue?" This is much more immersive than the standard, "OK, how many
units do I need to move adjacent to this enemy counter to get the 50
attack points necessary to get 5:1 odds?"
In BATTLES FROM THE BULGE, you have no clue how many combat factors an
infantry company has; you can find out it has 120 men with rifles, you
can count how many jeeps and machineguns it has - and you can use your
brain and experience to estimate whether 120 men can achieve a certain
objective or not, but there's none of
that mathematical certainty that surrounds more wargames. You can't
say, "OK, I add an armor platoon to the attack and get a column shift
for armor bonus, move this unit here so I get the die-roll modifier for
attacking across three hex-sides, and click the air-support button.
Voila! 10:1 odds!"
Another example would be movement. In most wargames, you click on a
unit and it shows you how far it can move. Exactly how far. To the
very hex. In BFTB, you can only estimate things like this. If the
objective is ten miles away, how long will it take a platoon of 45
soldiers to get there? At night. And they're half-exhausted. And they
have to cross a one-lane bridge that 2,000 other men and 300 vehicles
are planning to use at the same time. And it starts snowing halfway
through the march. You can use the routing tool to get an *estimate* of
how long it will take, but if the situation changes this could be wildly
off the mark.
Some gamers won't like this. Some of them like a more chess-like
experience. They'd be wise to steer clear, because the core of the BFTB
system is uncertainty and the fog of war.
But all is not lost for the micromanagers. You *can* - if you want to -
set the orders delay slider to "none" and issue orders directly to every
counter on the map. In this respect, the game can be made to function
like any conventional wargame - it plays just like TACOPS in this mode.
But played the way it was meant to be played, BFTB delivers a gameplay
experience like no other. Three things are at the core of this:
(1) The AI is just excellent, and easily up to the task of handling
your subordinate units. With good overall decisions on your part, and
careful attention to setting the unit options, it's just uncanny how
well your digital underlings handle their jobs.
(2) The fog-of-war is thick. You know what your objectives are, you
know where your forces are and what they consist of. Everything else is
hidden. As I previously mentioned, you know what men and equipment your
forces have, but you're completely in the dark about how quickly they
can achieve a task or how well - in a mathematical sense - they can get
it done.
(3) The interface is almost ideal - and I qualify with the "almost"
because nothing in this world is perfect - and never gets in the way.
At every turn, the way you think it should work turns out to be the way
it does work. In a very short time, you've forgotten the buttons and
knobs and started to think in terms of objectives, battlespace, forces,
and time.
Is it fun?
IE, is it $80 worth of fun? I'm having a blast with BFTB. I thought
HIGHWAY TO THE REICH was excellent. I thought CONQUEST OF THE AEGEAN
was better. And BATTLES FROM THE BULGE is insanely great.
The best improvement is that the AI has been upgraded to the point where
it's getting scary-smart. Not only does it handle your own units quite
well - it makes a damn good opponent, too. I've seen the AI programming
using flank attacks and even double-envelopment - a far cry from the
usual enemy AI that just shovels units at you like a dumb animal. The
AI uses blocking tactics, delaying tactics, tactical retreats. It even
attacks pretty well, though the nature of wargaming is that the human
player will probably want to be on the offensive (and good designers
take advantage of this).
Supplies, logistics, and simple *fatigue* are also much more prevalent
than the rudimentary programming of HTTR and even the improvement in
COTA. Unlike so many other games, BFTB represents units as *absolutely
needing* to rest and resupply or they're just useless. Unlike almost
every other game, you just can't march and fight the men 24/7; *they
won't do it*. The tanks won't run without gas, either, and you need
resupply *a lot*, just like in real life - get your proud panzer
battalion cut off and the death-clock starts ticking.
But the best part is the immersive nature of the command experience.
The player quickly gets into the mindset, "I'm commanding an army
corps," rather than, "I'm playing a game."
I'm loving this. It's fucking brilliant.
It was a long wait. COTA appeared four years ago, and one of my worries
about BFTB was that it would play "like COTA ... but with Americans."
That's simply not true. The system has been improved across the board,
sometimes in big, flashy ways (AI / logistics) and sometimes in subtle
ways (mixed-mode movement). But the overall experience of gameplay is
quite different and much better. If this kind of gaming experience
takes four years ... well, then it took four years.
As a last word ... yeah, $80 is kinda pricey. But we knew the thing
wasn't going to be *free*, and anyone who didn't think he was going to
pay at least $50 for this game is delusional. I, myself, was expecting
the price to be $60. OK, so it's an extra twenty bucks. I'm a cheap
bastard, and I dislike paying an extra $20.
But (I'm sorry, but I won't start mincing words at age 49) anyone who
denies himself the best PC wargame since ... fuck, since *nothing*,
*this is the best one* ... over a goddamn twenty-dollar bill needs to
get some therapy. I've seen some forum posts where dumbheads think
they're *punishing* Matrix / Panther for making the best wargame in PC
history and charging them $20 extra!
Buy the Smirnoff Silver instead of the Grey Goose next time out, and
you'll have the $20 you're so pissy about.
Wargame of the Century, in my book.
--
Giftzwerg
***
\\\\\\
\ , ,\
\ ] \ < ------- Mohammed
\\\\\\\
\\\\\\\
May 20 is "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day"
Oleg Mastruko
<giftzw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Buy the Smirnoff Silver instead of the Grey Goose next time out, and
>you'll have the $20 you're so pissy about.
Whoever buys FRENCH vodka over something from the real vodka
countries, AND pays a financial premium for that, needs to be punished
anyway.
I am big lover of French food and stuff, vodka, however, has to
come from some vodka belt country to be taken seriously.
Giftzwerg
oleg@_REMOVE_bug.hr says...
> >Buy the Smirnoff Silver instead of the Grey Goose next time out, and
> >you'll have the $20 you're so pissy about.
>
> Whoever buys FRENCH vodka over something from the real vodka
> countries, AND pays a financial premium for that, needs to be punished
> anyway.
>
> I am big lover of French food and stuff, vodka, however, has to
> come from some vodka belt country to be taken seriously.
Eh. I dunno. Vodka is, after all, just ethyl alcohol and water; to be
honest, I'm not sure I could tell the difference between "good" and
"bad" until you got down to the real popskull brands. And it's not like
the brown liquors (aging in a special keg for two decades), you just run
some grain through a distilling process and - blammo - you got vodka.
I'm not sure how much you can finesse such a process.
I actually like the Smirnoff Blue Label. 100 proof punch, nice neutral
flavor, not too pricey. Why ... I can have a snort right now!
eddys...@hotmail.com
> But the best part is the immersive nature of the command experience.
> The player quickly gets into the mindset, "I'm commanding an army
> corps," rather than, "I'm playing a game."
>
> I'm loving this. It's fucking brilliant.
This isn't a "first impression", this is a full review :)
I know you don't do forums, but I'll post a link to your review in the
BFTB forum
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Bloodstar
> But (I'm sorry, but I won't start mincing words at age 49) anyone who
> denies himself the best PC wargame since ... fuck, since *nothing*,
> *this is the best one* ... over a goddamn twenty-dollar bill needs to
> get some therapy. I've seen some forum posts where dumbheads think
> they're *punishing* Matrix / Panther for making the best wargame in PC
> history and charging them $20 extra!
Look this shit is just unnececary.
Read my lips - I don't fucking care about Battle of the Bulge. Theme.
Setting.
I just bought Glantz new book on April-Sep. 1942 period instead.
So I am not interested in this game. I will buy Napoleon Total War and
Rig'n'Roll.
And in fact never was interested in this engine and game.
Yawn.
Mario
Giftzwerg
2e846f...@k31g2000vbu.googlegroups.com>, eddys...@hotmail.com
says...
> > But the best part is the immersive nature of the command experience.
> > The player quickly gets into the mindset, "I'm commanding an army
> > corps," rather than, "I'm playing a game."
> >
> > I'm loving this. It's fucking brilliant.
>
> This isn't a "first impression", this is a full review :)
I like the term "first impressions," for a couple of reasons:
(1) I dislike it when some goof pops up and points out something I
missed. It might be long-ish for a first impression, but if I leave out
something, I can always respond, "Hey, it's not like it's a full review
or anything..."
(2) Closely related to (1) is that I'm generally posting about a game
very, very soon after release. This one took a little longer - but only
because I was so busy playing BFTB. I don't review games on multiple
machines, multiple graphics cards, or multiple operating systems. So
it's entirely possible that I could overlook something as huge as the
ATI graphics debacle in COMBAT MISSION: SHOCK FORCE.
> I know you don't do forums, but I'll post a link to your review in the
> BFTB forum
The DMCA takedown notice will go in the mail this afternoon, and anyone
who reads it will get a subpoena by Friday.
Giftzwerg
eddys...@hotmail.com
> The DMCA takedown notice will go in the mail this afternoon, and anyone
> who reads it will get a subpoena by Friday.
Some poor Karp fisher is going to be scratching his head :)
Anyway, people seem to like your review :
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/m.asp?m=2484507
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Vincenzo Beretta
<eddys...@hotmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:57339c29-8b7a-45d0...@c11g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
BTW, I'm noticing a trend of sorts :^D
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2484279
Bloodstar
Heh, I won't but in fact support Arjuna's integrity as a developer to charge
as much as he wants.
On the other hand how much wargamers will actually buy the game is thing to
be seen.
I am on my way to make some money betting hehe. At last.
Mario
Old...@noway.com
<george.w...@microsoft.com> wrote:
>I will buy Napoleon Total War
Got it, been playing it ever since. They added some nice
stuff to it, and it's much harder then there other "Total War" games.
With in a few months I took most of France, even wornded Napoleon in a
battle. Then France came back and clean my clock, lost all the
regions I held in France, along with my armies that were holding them.
Bloodstar
>
> Got it, been playing it ever since. They added some nice
> stuff to it, and it's much harder then there other "Total War" games.
> With in a few months I took most of France, even wornded Napoleon in a
> battle. Then France came back and clean my clock, lost all the
> regions I held in France, along with my armies that were holding them.
Hehe... Must buy it today !! :) Thanks.
smr
You're a fuckhead. Just tossing that out there.
--
smr
Bloodstar
> You're a fuckhead. Just tossing that out there.
And you moron are again in my filter. Bye bye idiot.
smr
>> You're a fuckhead. Just tossing that out there.
>
> And you moron are again in my filter. Bye bye idiot.
Sweet!
--
smr